On yesterday's "Hagee Hotline," Pastor John Hagee declared that the Supreme Court decision striking down gay marriage bans "has made America the new Sodom and Gomorrah" which must now face the judgment of God.

"The Supreme Court in Washington has handed down its decision in a 5-4 ruling supporting same-sex marriage," Hagee declared. "But the Supreme Court in Heaven has handed down its unanimous decision in a 3-0 ruling from God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit [that] marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman. Same-sex marriage will never be accepted in Heaven as legitimate, so says God Almighty."

"This Supreme Court has made America the new Sodom and Gomorrah," he continued. "God will have to judge America or He's going to have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Tom DeLay appeared on Newsmax TV yesterday, where he told host Steve Malzberg that, just as he had predicted, all Hell is now breaking loose because of the Supreme Court ruling striking down gay marriage bans. Things are now so out of control, DeLay said, that he even knows about a "secret memo" from the Justice Department aimed at legalizing "12 new perversions," including bestiality and pedophilia.

"We've already found a secret memo coming out of the Justice Department," DeLay claimed. "They're now going to go after 12 new perversions, things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal. Not only that, but they have a whole list of strategies to go after the churches, the pastors, and any businesses that tries to assert their religious liberty. This is coming and it's coming like a tidal wave."

Malzberg, who was predictably shocked by the news that Department of Justice was now going to seek to legalize things like pedophilia, asked DeLay to clarify that that was what he had just claimed and DeLay assured him that it was.

"That's correct," he said. "They're coming down with 12 new perversions. LGBT is only the beginning. They are going to start expanding it to the other perversions."

Glenn Beck says that over the last 10 days, America has been slapping God in the face like he has never seen before.

Mychal Massie has nothing against the Confederate flag because "the Confederate flag has never called me a nigger, but white liberals have."

Julio Severo warns that "homosexuality brought destruction to Sodom, and it will bring destruction to any city or superpower embracing it. A remnant of Christians faithful to God should warn about the danger of sodomy and support efforts to protect children and their families from it."

Michael Peroutka is trying to use his new official county council title to promote the Institute on the Constitution and has even tried to promote its materials to schoolkids using county letterhead.

Finally, Jim Bakker warns that there will be dire consequences for legalizing gay marriage: "God is not mocked. America has mocked God. We have been a blessed nation, but we are not a blessed nation any longer."

The head of Alabama’s court system, an employee of notoriously anti-gay Chief Justice Roy Moore, has sent a letter to Gov. Robert Bentley and other state elected officials urging them to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling or else “become complicit in the takeover by the wicked,” reports AL.com.

“Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous,” Win Johnson, director of legal staff at the state’s Administrative Office of the Court, wrote to the elected officials in a letter obtained by the newspaper. “If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.”

He continues with a defense of criminal prohibitions on homosexuality: “The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.”

He then equates compliance with the marriage equality ruling with obedience in Nazi Germany, writing “the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it.”

Jesus Christ is Lord of all. He came to save the world by His death and resurrection. That world includes you, me, the family, the civil government, all the institutions of life. He came to advance His Father's kingdom, not watch man run rampant upon the earth as if Christ had never come. As if it were the days of Noah!

Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.

The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.

We're facing something even worse now, the civil government taking a new step and actually requiring the approval and sanctifying by the state of an evil behavior. Five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have now opined that the States of this country and all of us must approve of so-called marriages of same sex couples.

Therefore, the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it. The civil government must protect what it approves of. It must protect the advocates' employment, their business dealings, their lives in every way. Against whom? Against those who think their lifestyle is evil. That's you and me, bible-believing Christians, the Church, etc.

Public official, what will you do? Will you stand up for the law of Alabama, for the people, for the weak and vulnerable, for the law of God? Or will you capitulate? Will you become complicit in the takeover by the wicked?

"I must follow the law," you say. Law? What law? There is no law anymore, there's just opinion. One day this, one day that. When the law becomes merely the opinion of a handful of people on the courts, there is no longer any law. There is tyranny. There is chaos. But there is no law.

The young and the weak, those that are caused to stumble by courts that approve of what is evil, are those whom Jesus referred to when he said, "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." Luke 17:2. You don't want to be complicit in allowing such stumbling blocks.

Don't use the Nazi war-crimes trial defense: "My superiors (or the courts) told me to do it." You're not standing for the rule of law when you capitulate to a law that defies God and exposes people to the wicked. You're just a coward making excuses!

Or will your conscience cause you to resign? Why would you leave the people of this State, their children, your children and grandchildren to the wolves, those who would rend the society apart with their denial of what's good and evil?

Your duty is to stand against the ravages of a superior authority that would go beyond its rightful power and force upon the people something evil. That's what the founders of our country did when Parliament exceeded its powers. That's what the Puritans in civil government in the 1600's did when the King exceeded his powers.

On Judgment Day, you won't stand in front of the media, the advocates of "Equality," or even the federal courts; you'll stand before the King of Kings, the Judge and Ruler over the Kings of the Earth, Jesus Christ. His law is not subject to the vote of man, and He, asthe good and loving author of that law, does not exempt any nation from it. The law's author, speaking of Himself as "the stone which the builders rejected," said, "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Luke 20:18.

What can you do? You have authority as an elected official. You also are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and Alabama Constitution. Find a way to do so. Don't acquiesce to the takeover (actually the takedown)! Use your authority and every legal angle to oppose the tyrants! If necessary, just say, "No." It is not rebellion for you to say, "Your interpretation of the Constitution is wrong, beyond your authority, and detrimental to this nation." In fact, it's your duty. You're not opposing the rule of law, you're upholding it by saying that.

Far-right pundit Ann Coulter joined Eric Metaxas on his radio show last Friday to discuss her new anti-immigrant book, “Adios, America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole.”

Metaxas tied anti-immigrant politics to the idea of American exceptionalism, saying that that “in order for America to fulfill its mission to the world, we’re supposed to bless the world. This country has been a blessing to all the countries that are not America, from practically day one.”

“We won’t be anymore,” retorted Coulter.

“That’s the point,” continued Metaxas. “Because if you care about people who are not in America…then you must let America be America” instead of “undermining America’s ability to be America.”

Super-patriot Coulter agreed and added: “It won’t be America, it’ll be Mexico. And will Mexico go rushing in when there’s an earthquake in Haiti? Will they be sending out more foreign aid than any other nation? No they won’t.”

Metaxas reasoned that Americans, especially Christians, are “supposed to love everybody. But loving people doesn’t mean telling them what they’re doing is okay. In fact, usually loving somebody will involve saying something that the person maybe doesn’t wanna hear.”

“It’s also not loving people to be dumping these misogynistic alien cultures on the country that are going to end up, um, raping young American girls,” Coulter responded. “Is that loving the young American girls?” Especially when it is being done “without warning, and, and without our consent.”

So it came as no surprise that Huckabee released this image today on his Facebook page declaring that “an attack on Christians and their religious liberty is a hate crime that must be prosecuted.”

He also vowed to use executive orders to stop “discrimination” against entities that oppose same-sex marriage and pledged to “direct the U.S. Attorney General to prosecute as hate crimes groups or individuals who discriminated or attacked individuals, businesses, religious organizations and others for their religious beliefs about marriage.”

Of course, hate crimes motivated by religion are by federal hate crimes laws, laws which Huckabee has criticized as discriminatory. He justified his opposition to hate crime laws by alleging that they enable the government to “start regulating what people can think.”

More telling is Huckabee’s claim that an “attack” on “religious liberty is a hate crime,” since Huckabee believes that nearly anything he personally finds offensive is an attack on religious liberty, whether it be measures giving LGBT people equal protection under the law or commonsense regulations of insurance plans.

Huckabee even viewed the entire Chick-fil-A saga as an attack on religious liberty, as he described in this bizarre anti-gay film:

Rep. Glenn Grothman, Republican of Wisconsin, joined Milwaukee-area radio host Vicki McKenna on Friday to discuss the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down state bans on same-sex marriage. Grothman told McKenna that the Supreme Court’s reasoning, which was based on the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, was an affront to the Americans who died in the Civil War because it was “a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”

“Our president during the Civil War was, of course, Abraham Lincoln, who was known as the most biblical of presidents, somebody who quoted the Bible a lot,” he said. "In the Civil War, some 600,000 people died in a country that was much less populated than that today. And it was a much more religious country and I think a lot of people who died fighting in that war felt they died fighting for a religious cause, you know, ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’ and all that.

“I think it would shock those people who died in that war to find out the constitutional amendment which was ratified kind of as a culmination of their great efforts and their great deaths would be 150 years later, a little less than 150 years later, used by these five robed, arrogant, robed people to take this constitutional amendment and say that that constitutional amendment that was drafted after the Civil War was in fact an amendment designed to say that same-sex marriage had to be legal.”

He added that the decision is “particularly offensive” given that the 14th Amendment was “drafted by a people who felt they had just engaged in a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”

Phyllis Schlafly is none too pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision striking down state gay marriage bans, and has a modest proposal for Congress: Pass a resolution affirming the “dignity of opposite-sex married couples,” especially that of couples where “a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker.”

While this resolution might not change much in the short term, the anti-feminist crusader writes in her syndicated column today, it might act as an inspiration to the anti-gay movement as they continue to fight marriage equality.

Justice Kennedy's opinion for a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court has rightly been condemned for its lack of grounding in the constitutional text he is sworn to uphold. Unable to find gay marriage in either the due process clause or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, Kennedy ultimately rests his case on what Justice Clarence Thomas sarcastically called the "dignity clause" of the Constitution.

There is no such clause, of course, although Kennedy's majority opinion mentioned "dignity" nine times. But if dignity can be conferred by decisions of the Supreme Court, then Congress can do so, too.

Therein lies a first response: Congress should formally recognize the dignity of opposite-sex married couples and resolve to protect that dignity in our laws. A joint resolution should recite the many reasons why the special union of husband and wife has been honored for "millennia," as Kennedy admitted.

…

A crash program to rebuild the traditional American nuclear family is urgently necessary for continuing our nation's political and economic success in this century. This won't happen if we transform marriage into a means of giving "dignity" to mostly childless homosexuals.

Once Congress is on a roll to confer dignity, it should confer an extra measure of dignity on the single-earner family, where a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker, a role more socially beneficial than working in the paid labor force.

…

After reciting the foregoing reasons and many others, Congress should conclude its resolution by formally resolving that the traditional family, founded on a married husband and wife, carries special dignity and deserves special recognition because it provides unique benefits to society.

This is not to deny that every human person has value and dignity, or that other domestic relationships may have some value in limited circumstances. But Congress should respond to Kennedy with a ringing affirmation of the unique dignity that should be accorded to society's foundational unit: the marriage of husband and wife.

Naysayers will scoff that the foregoing resolution doesn't change the Supreme Court decision, and you can imagine a late-night comedian comparing it to the medal of courage the Wizard of Oz presented to the Cowardly Lion. But movie fans will recall how that gesture inspired Dorothy and her companions toward achieving their goal.

For years, Glenn Beck has been a vocal opponent of boycotts, a position most likely rooted in the fact that it was a sustained effort to convince advertisers not to support his program that ultimately brought his Fox News show to an end.

But, in recent years, Beck's principled opposition to boycotts seems to have shifted and today he and his co-hosts held a long discussion of the merits of them, prompted by NBC's decision to cut ties with Donald Trump.

While co-host Stu Burguiere maintained the position that launching a boycott is nothing more than an attempt to shut down the free speech of others, Beck and co-host Pat Gray asserted that conservatives are the "good kids" who never raise a ruckus while those on the left are the troublemakers who get all the attention from corporations.

Perhaps it is time for conservatives to begin to launch boycotts of their own, Beck said, especially now that companies like Disney are lighting up landmarks in celebration of gay marriage ... and making films about Charles Darwin!

"Boycotts work and we have created a vacuum. We do nothing," Beck said. "Let me give you this story, they're doing a new movie, kind of an Indiana Jones swashbuckling spirit of a five year voyage in 1831 on ship H.M.S. Beagle to the coastline of South America to find and follow the man who made discoveries that made him one of the most influential figures in human history."

"Wow, this sounds like a swashbuckling thriller that we are going to have to take our families to see," Beck said sarcastically. "Doesn't it sound great? It's Charles Darwin. It's the story of Charles Darwin and so we're going to find out how exactly he came up with the idea, made the discoveries that brought him to the theory of evolution. Thank you, Disney! That's fantastic."